2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia All 2010 - 2011 - 2012 - 2013 - 2014 - 2015 Camaro news, photos, and videos

Yet another direction for the Z28 possibility?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 29, 2009 | 02:37 PM
  #31  
jcamere94z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,512
From: Miami, FL, US
Originally Posted by Z284ever
Just to clarify, any "Z/28 or 1LE type" package IMO, should be a complete and comprehensive package bundled under the Z/28 brand name.

And what I was saying was, however Ford markets their Track Pack and upcoming 5.0L combo, it would be nice if Camaro could have something to compete with it. Because, currently it doesn't.
If they go that route... the Track Pack Camaro should be under the 1LE name but instead of being a manual windows, radio and A/C delete and that sort of thing.. make sure it's a very nice suspension setup that matches if not beats the Mustangs track pack.

Within those lines you can still have the opportunity open to create a monster as a Z/28.
Old Jul 29, 2009 | 02:47 PM
  #32  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by jcamere94z28
If they go that route... the Track Pack Camaro should be under the 1LE name but instead of being a manual windows, radio and A/C delete and that sort of thing.. make sure it's a very nice suspension setup that matches if not beats the Mustangs track pack.

Within those lines you can still have the opportunity open to create a monster as a Z/28.
I wasn't advocating a "Track Pack" for the Camaro. I was saying that a Z/28 should outperform a Mustang with the Track Pack and the upcoming 5.0L.
Old Jul 29, 2009 | 02:48 PM
  #33  
OutsiderIROC-Z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,688
From: Middle of Kansas
Originally Posted by 2010_5thgen
i think when he said "got it" it was kind of like" yeah we hear you, so stop bugging us about it. "
This.
Old Jul 29, 2009 | 02:51 PM
  #34  
OutsiderIROC-Z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,688
From: Middle of Kansas
Originally Posted by colin911
Forget the LSA and make the Z28 a lighter SS!! We don't need more power, just less weight.
Originally Posted by 2010_5thgen
thats what i think. rather than supercharging it, just give it the vette motor strait up no de-tunning, lighten it up and stiffen the suspension up. let ford have the blown gt500 and the z28 can do it N/A.
I like these!
Old Jul 29, 2009 | 11:28 PM
  #35  
HAZ-Matt's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,000
From: TX Med Ctr
Originally Posted by Z284ever
That would be nice, and I agree. But I don't think very much weight loss will be possible on the current car.

The Track Pack has won most subjective comparisons with the SS, in large measure, because of it's more direct steering and less understeer. If I were developing a Z/28 package, those would certainly be two issues I'd address first. But as has been mentioned, physics is physics, and masking Camaro's 300 pound difference with chassis tuning won't be easy.
I don't think there is any reason why they shouldn't fix those two issues on the SS. The steering at the very least.

At any rate, with the Corvette GS we have seen an LS3 with dry sump oiling... perhaps that could make its way into a Z28.
Old Jul 30, 2009 | 03:43 AM
  #36  
AdioSS's Avatar
West South Central Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
I am sure there is really VERY LITTLE detuning on the LS3. The differences in the exhaust and intake tracts are enough to make up that 10hp difference.

Since the chassis was designed to handle the LSA, why not throw it in?
I wonder which costs more to GM, the LS7 or the LSA?
Old Jul 30, 2009 | 07:23 AM
  #37  
2010_5thgen's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,482
From: ohio
Originally Posted by AdioSS
I am sure there is really VERY LITTLE detuning on the LS3. The differences in the exhaust and intake tracts are enough to make up that 10hp difference.

Since the chassis was designed to handle the LSA, why not throw it in?
I wonder which costs more to GM, the LS7 or the LSA?
one reason,i believe , that the origional plan for the z28(lsa) isnt happening, is because of the MPG from the lsa. if they were to just keep the ls3 from the vette. maybe make it D.I. get some more hp, and throw it in the camaro. with minor suspension stiffening,tires,wheels, different bumpers,hood some cosmetics differences between the z and ss, that would be perfect. retain good MPG higher HP and a killer look and still be at a reasonable price. thats would be my version of a z28. no supercharger is needed.
Old Jul 30, 2009 | 09:09 AM
  #38  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by HAZ-Matt
I don't think there is any reason why they shouldn't fix those two issues on the SS. The steering at the very least.

No arguments there.
Old Jul 30, 2009 | 09:20 AM
  #39  
2010_5thgen's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,482
From: ohio
whats wrong with the steering? i havent noticed any problems or had any problems.
Old Jul 30, 2009 | 02:49 PM
  #40  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by HAZ-Matt
At any rate, with the Corvette GS we have seen an LS3 with dry sump oiling... perhaps that could make its way into a Z28.

The GS (and Z06) get the dry sump because of the lateral G they are capable of pulling. Not sure if that would apply to the 5th gen. If not, just extra weight and cost.
Old Jul 30, 2009 | 09:20 PM
  #41  
AdioSS's Avatar
West South Central Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
I think it would be awesome if the Z/28 were the first to get a DI LSx, but for some reason I bet the Vette will get that honor.

A DI 6.2L would be a very adequate replacement engine for the big LS7 in the Z06. Then the GS could get a DI 6.0L and the base Vette could get a DI 5.3L.
Old Jul 30, 2009 | 10:42 PM
  #42  
HAZ-Matt's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,000
From: TX Med Ctr
Originally Posted by Z284ever
The GS (and Z06) get the dry sump because of the lateral G they are capable of pulling. Not sure if that would apply to the 5th gen. If not, just extra weight and cost.
What can an F5 pull on slicks?

And as for the last point, there are a lot of things that get added to performance variants to market them that aren't necessary or even beneficial for performance (eg C/D brake rotors).
Old Jul 31, 2009 | 06:58 AM
  #43  
2010_5thgen's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,482
From: ohio
Originally Posted by AdioSS
I think it would be awesome if the Z/28 were the first to get a DI LSx, but for some reason I bet the Vette will get that honor.

A DI 6.2L would be a very adequate replacement engine for the big LS7 in the Z06. Then the GS could get a DI 6.0L and the base Vette could get a DI 5.3L.
why go back to past motors? why not just keep with the current motors and make it DI. 6.2? even the 6.0 . theres no need to put the 5.3 DI or not in the vette.
Old Jul 31, 2009 | 09:21 AM
  #44  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
Originally Posted by Z284ever
The GS (and Z06) get the dry sump because of the lateral G they are capable of pulling. Not sure if that would apply to the 5th gen. If not, just extra weight and cost.
Agreed, I cant see where a dry sump system would be worth it other than the "WOW" factor.
Old Jul 31, 2009 | 09:21 AM
  #45  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by HAZ-Matt
What can an F5 pull on slicks?

And as for the last point, there are a lot of things that get added to performance variants to market them that aren't necessary or even beneficial for performance (eg C/D brake rotors).
I was thinking that too. I was going to add something about the marketing value or rather the bragging rights of a "dry sump" to my post, but didn't.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:12 AM.